DoG's Top 100 Test Bowlers Countdown Thread 100-1

[trundler]

I'll be interested to see what Steyn and Rabada's adjusted strike rates look like.

And Trueman's too.

 

[Adders]

How do you know Jimmeh made the list?

Because I have the utmost faith in you and your methodology.

 

[OverratedSanity]

How does 50-innings peak average/strikerate work for players like Bond and Clark who didn't even bowl in 50 innings.

 

[Days of Grace]

No.68

Graham McKenzie (Australia) 700

Quality Points: 625
Career Points: 75

Career: 1961-1971
Wickets: 246
Gold Performances: 4
7/153 vs. England at Manchester 1964 (15.30)
6/48 vs. England at Adelaide 1966 (15.32)
7/66 vs. India at Melbourne 1967 (15.57)
8/71 vs. West Indies at Melbourne 1968 (18.36)
Silver Performances: 9
Bronze Performances: 5

Overall Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 28.63 (29.79) 60.53 (71.87) 4.47
50 Innings Peak Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings (1964-1968): 24.39 51.97 5.74
Non-Home Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 28.25 62.21 4.50
Quality Opposition Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 30.03 63.42 4.41

Huge adjustment in strike-rate for post-war bowlers up to 1975. Very low-risk era for batsmen.

 

[Days of Grace]

How does 50-innings peak average/strikerate work for players like Bond and Clark who didn't even bowl in 50 innings.

They just keep the overall stats. And they lose points in both overall and peak points because they bowled in less than 50 innings.

 

[Starfighter]

Nice bump down in strike rate for McKenzie but I expected the average adjustment to be quite a bit larger though, considering those that some modern players such as Lee and Siddle have gotten. Doesn't quite 'add up' to me.

Nice clutch of gold performances too. I can imagine Murali's list of gold performances will be looong.

 

[trundler]

I expect Hadlee to have a lot of gold performances too.

 

[OverratedSanity]

The only entries which have genuinely surprised me do far are Brian Statham and bishen bedi. Then again, they do have strike rates on the higher end, so it makes sense but CW seems to rate them higher than where they ended up.

 

[morgieb]

Clark ahead of Gillespie is pretty ITSTL.

 

[Days of Grace]

Nice bump down in strike rate for McKenzie but I expected the average adjustment to be quite a bit larger though, considering those that some modern players such as Lee and Siddle have gotten. Doesn't quite 'add up' to me.

Nice clutch of gold performances too. I can imagine Murali's list of gold performances will be looong.

Here are the list of eras that I chose with their runs per wicket and balls per wicket:

1877-1889 19.00 50.00
1890-1914 26.00 55.00
1920-1939 33.00 73.00
1946-1975 32.00 77.00
1975-1999 32.00 67.00
2000-present 34.00 63.00

 

[stephen]

Clark ahead of Gillespie is pretty ITSTL.

Not really when you consider how good Clark was for that small period.

 

[Burgey]

Clark was a proper gun bowler. Shame he was curtailed by injuries. Really smart operator. Makes some interesting comments in the media when he’s interviewed too.

 

[Days of Grace]

No.67

Charlie Turner (Australia) 705

Quality Points: 666
Career Points: 40

Career: 1887-1895
Wickets: 101
Gold Performances: 3
6/15 vs. England at Sydney 1887 (15.08)
5/36 vs. England at Lord's 1888 (15.58)
5/51 vs. England Melbourne 1892 (15.13)
Silver Performances: 4
Bronze Performances: 6

Overall Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 22.24 (16.53) 62.21 (51.28) 7.46
50 Innings Peak Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings (1887-1895): 22.24 62.21 7.46
Non-Home Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 26.58 66.51 6.58
Quality Opposition Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 22.24 62.21 7.46

The 'Terror' is the first of the 19th century bowlers to appear on the list. All his matches were against quality opposition. 13 medal performances in 30 innings. His overall points per innings ranks 2nd among all bowlers in the top 100.

 

[morgieb]

Will be interesting to see what other 19th Century bowlers get up there. Lohmann would be obvious. Someone like Briggs and Peel, perhaps. Maybe even Richardson given how much SR and WPM seem to be weighted here.

 

[Starfighter]

Here are the list of eras that I chose with their runs per wicket and balls per wicket:

1877-1889 19.00 50.00
1890-1914 26.00 55.00
1920-1939 33.00 73.00
1946-1975 32.00 77.00
1975-1999 32.00 67.00
2000-present 34.00 63.00

I don't think lumping the forties, fifties, sixties and early seventies together is 'that' good. There's a big difference between fifties and sixtes in Australia (27.26 @ 71.8 in the fifties, 36.85 @ 86.9 in the sixties), though not so much elsewhere. So I don't think McKenzie would get the normalisation that someone like Lee would, however by reputation and averages bowling conditions were probably worse during McKenzie's career. The pitches then were supposed to have been comparable to those now, maybe even slower.

 

[Days of Grace]

I don't think lumping the forties, fifties, sixties and early seventies together is 'that' good. There's a big difference between fifties and sixtes in Australia (27.26 @ 71.8 in the fifties, 36.85 @ 86.9 in the sixties), though not so much elsewhere. So I don't think McKenzie would get the normalisation that someone like Lee would, however by reputation and averages bowling conditions were probably worse during McKenzie's career. The pitches then were supposed to have been comparable to those now, maybe even slower.

The opposition and match conditions also play a part in the adjustments.

I learnt through trial and error that adjusting by country or decade resulted small sample sizes and thus in adjustments that were too extreme.

 

[Starfighter]

I learnt through trial and error that adjusting by country or decade resulted small sample sizes and thus in adjustments that were too extreme.

I think your war-75 block would be one of the hardest to do, at least in Australia.

The opposition and match conditions also play a part in the adjustments.

I'm not sure the variance would be big enough in the required direction for what I was talking about though, but I can't be bothered to check really.

 

[Days of Grace]

No.66

Lance Gibbs (West Indies) 712

Quality Points: 615
Career Points: 97

Career: 1958-1976
Wickets: 313
Gold Performances: 5
8/38 vs. India at Bridgetown 1962 (18.12)
6/98 vs. England at Manchester 1963 (16.04)
6/29 vs. Australia at Georgetown 1965 (16.37)
6/39 vs. England at Leeds 1966 (16.08)
7/98 vs. India at Mumbai 1975 (16.68)
Silver Performances: 8
Bronze Performances: 4

Overall Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 27.90 (29.09) 75.22 (87.75) 4.14
50 Innings Peak Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings (1959-1966): 21.74 60.71 5.45
Non-Home Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 27.83 76.55 4.17
Quality Opposition Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 27.40 73.60 4.60

Good, solid set of numbers for Lance Gibbs with an outstanding peak. However, his strike-rate hurts him.

 

[Days of Grace]

I think your war-75 block would be one of the hardest to do, at least in Australia.


I'm not sure the variance would be big enough in the required direction for what I was talking about though, but I can't be bothered to check really.

Also, small era samples would produce large variances because of the quality of bowlers and batsmen on show. I think Australia had great bowlers in the 1950s but not so much in the 1960s.

 

[Starfighter]

All of Gibbs' wickets in his 8/38 were taken in a single spell conceding six runs at the end the Indian innings after Sardesai and Manjrekar had batted about 100 overs for 98 runs, and with a ball more than 150 overs old. One of the slowest and most remarkable innings of all time.